Podcasts

I’m not doing much these days, but one thing I am still doing is listening to podcasts. Two years ago I listed all my favorite podcasts [link]. Here’s an updated list. These are all podcasts I like and listen to.

The Skeptics' Guide to the Universe
When this comes up on my mp3 player, I know I'm going to enjoy the next hour. Dr. Steven Novella and his "Rogues" discuss the latest science and the state of rational thinking. More than a little irreverent, but they take reality seriously. My favorite podcast.

This American Life
I’ve been listening to This American Life on public radio since it started back in 1995. It is a mix of fiction and non-fiction told as a story. “I laughed. I cried.“ I had a cliché moment. I don’t think there’s anything out there like it or better than it.

Radio Lab
A highly produced science program asking irreverent but relevant questions about science and our relationship to science.

Astronomy Cast
Dr. Pamela Gay and Fraser Cain review a topic in astronomy every week. Having listened to the podcast and their voluminous archive I feel like I’ve gained a pretty solid amateur background in astronomy and astrophysics.

The History of Rome
A straightforward telling of what happened and when in the Roman Empire. Made interesting by describing competing interpretations of personalities and motivations and by placing events within the sweep of history. I visualize the podcaster, Mike Duncan, with a bit of a smirk on his face as he tells his stories.

Skeptoid: Critical Analysis of Pop Phenomena
I enjoy hearing from Brian Dunning as he blows another bit of pseudoscience out of the water. Unfortunately, in trying to make his points, he sometimes uses logical fallacies himself. Especially creating a straw-man arguments implying that a few points represent an entire concept.

The Material World
A science program from BBC Radio 4. Host Quentin Cooper does an excellent job of making the science straight forward and interesting.

The Classic Tales Podcast
Classic short stories read by B.J. Harrison. Many stories and authors I’ve wanted to read, but never got around to.

Selected Shorts
Short stories presented live at “Symphony Space” in NYC. Mostly modern fiction. Some stories can be challenging and sometimes I’m not in the mood for the story presented, but there are plenty of good ones to make it worth listening to.

Point of Inquiry
Calm and incisive interview show put on by the Center for Inquiry “focusing on CFI’s issues: religion, human values and the borderlands of science“.

All in the Mind
A fascinating and far ranging program from Australia’s ABC Radio National hosted by Natasha Mitchell. All programs have interested me and some programs have moved me.

Science Talk by Scientific American
Calm and incisive interview show put on by Scientific American. Science and technology are always interesting.

A Way with Words
Martha Barnette and Grant Barrett are two people with a love and knowledge of language. They share their passion with callers and guests and with us through a weekly podcast.

Grammar Girl: Quick and Dirty Tips for Better Writing
Grammar should be fun. Short interesting discussions about grammar and usage.

Legal Lad’s Quick and Dirty Tips for a More Lawful Life
Understanding the law should be fun too. Short interesting discussions about the law.

To the Best of our Knowledge
A calm-and-rational detailed look at a topic twice per week. I've been listening to it on public radio for years.

New Yorker: Fiction
Deborah Treisman, fiction editor for the New Yorker sits down once a month with a current fiction author for the New Yorker and the current author reads an older piece of fiction from the New Yorker. The quality of the stories is remarkable and the insights available from an editor and an author are fascinating.

Escape Pod
Science fiction short stories roughly weekly. Edited and hosted by Mur Lafferty.

Clarkesworld Magazine
Science fiction short stories twice monthly. Podcast director Kate Baker.

X Minus One Podcast
Classic radio science fiction from the 1950s. Some of it is excellent and some is dreck; all of it is an insight to the thinking of the time.

The Onion Radio News
Short satire in a news radio format. A hilarious new item every day.

The Moth Podcast
True stories told live weekly.

Science Times
A podcast based on the New York Times science section.

Tech Talk
The New York Times Bettina Edelstein, J.D. Biersdorfer and Pedro Rafael Rosado weekly review of what’s happening in technology. This helps me keep in the loop about what toys are coming out and what people are saying about them.

The Tolkien Professor
Corey Olsen is a tenured English professor breaking down the separation between an academic perspective and that of a general reader. He makes it easy to take Tolkien seriously, but doesn’t take the fun out of the fantasy.

In our Time with Melvyn Bragg
Every week Melvyn Bragg interviews experts in some area of history. Wide ranging. The last three weeks covered the ideas of Thomas Malthus, the Origins of Infectious Disease, and the Battle of Stamford Bridge

The Straight Dope
Cecil Adams answers questions with wit and thorough research.

Merriam Webster’s Word of the Day
Short and sweet. A word, its definition, origin, and usage. Sometimes it’s a word that’s completely new to me, other times it’s one I use regularly.

People of Equal Talent

"I am somehow less interested in the weight and convolutions of Einstein's brain than in the near certainty that people of equal talent have lived and died in cotton fields and sweatshops."

Stephen Jay Gould

Perhaps that quote will help me sleep.

Rudeness on the Radio

Letter to my local AM radio station:

I don’t usually listen to W*** during the day, but I happened to tune in to Rush Limbaugh yesterday.

I wouldn’t let anyone talk like that in my home;
No one would ever be allowed to talk like that in a school;
I’ve never heard anyone talk so rudely in any work environment;
People get angry at city council meetings, but I’ve never seen such incivility.

The local people I hear on W*** are good folks – why do you allow this to happen in your place of business?

I know it's not really as simple as this, but it really is as simple as this.

Health Care Reform # 8

I watched Barrack Obama’s speech to the joint session of congress while eating dinner last night. I purposely haven’t read any commentary yet. I wasn’t optimistic about the speech, but I had hope. Here are my thoughts:


He is starting from a position where he has already compromised on critical issues. He’s proposing a regulated private system with public funding for the poorest. He is being accused of communism. Since he is already demonized, he may as well take the step to a government funded capitalist system like the rest of the world.

I think I heard him say that a single-payer system is a government controlled health care system. If that’s what he said, he’s wrong. It is a taxpayer funded capitalist system. He says that we must support the health insurance and the pharmaceutical industries which have served us so poorly. If we want savings and improved outcomes, we have to make a difficult transition. We may as well do it now.

As I listened, I didn’t hear anything about the public option until near the end. He seemed to describe it as no different from the health co-ops which have been discussed. His public option seems to be available only to those who could not otherwise afford insurance. This seems to guarantee that no one would choose it voluntarily. It also makes it impossible for the public option to become the dominant health plan. That should mollify the critics, but probably won’t. I think it makes it a failure over all.

He didn’t do anything to contradict the stories about his deals with the pharmaceutical industry or hospitals.

He teased Republicans about malpractice law. He got them excited. Then he showed that he wasn't serious. Think how betrayed the Republican’s felt after sitting there applauding his idea. Of course abuse of the legal system is not a major part of the problem, but it is part of the problem. Why not compromise here. At least establish standards of care and caps on pain and suffering.

I didn’t hear anything he said that would really decrease costs. He’s adding layers.

I don’t like the idea of punishing people for failing to buy insurance. We should have a system which provides for all instead of a system which punishes people for trying to manage without government involvement. I respect people like that. That is going to anger and mobilize many people – for good reason.


Most importantly, he had no specific plan to offer. The current hodgepodge of messy bills still exists. There is no one plan which can be explained and defended. I can’t believe he doesn’t see this.


Good things:

He made it clear that insurance companies had to be reasonable.

He did refer to some statements as lies, but he didn’t get specific. He addressed death panels, cuts to Medicare and illegal immigrants.

He made clear that Medicare, Social Security, and Medicaid were all seen as disasters for the country and they weren’t. In fact, we are dependent on them.


I’ll work for this, but he’s fighting for a small thing. We have to fight as hard as if he were trying to accomplish a big thing.

StumbleUpon Back-up

BACK-UP

I used to hang out on StumbleUpon (SU) as SchreiberBike. I decided that I wanted to archive all my reviews to keep on my own PC, but there was no obvious ways to do it.

Putting together a suggestion by Heritas from the Help Group and the use of a macro, I was able to get a backup my 964 reviews and blog postings without much work. It looks like I could similarly backup all 3753 “thumbs up” I made while I was using SU, but I don’t think I’ll bother with that.

I use the Firefox browser and installed the Scrapbook extension. That allows you to download a copy of one page with linked pictures to your PC.

One page at a time for 97 pages would be a bit boring though. I used a macro program to automate the process.

Using a macro, you can set it to:

1. Copy the page
2. Wait five seconds
3. Move to the next page
4. Wait ten seconds
5. Repeat

It worked for me.

Sinophobia, Factoids, and Facts

Here's a ubiquitous "factoid" I'd heard a number of times over the years. I ran into it again and thought I'd check it out.

If the population of China walked past you, 8 abreast, the line would never end because of the rate of reproduction.

It presents itself as an interesting fact, but it's totally racist and hearkens back to the Sinophobia which has been a major part of American history. It is another bit of propaganda teaching us to be afraid.

I even found a reference to this being presented during the Cold War as if you lined up all of the Chinese and machine-gunned them as they walked by you you'd never kill them all because they'd reproduce too fast. Next time somebody tells you that the 50s were the good-old-days, remember this kind of racism.

Anyway, I wondered if it were true. It's repeated enough, there must be some basis in it. Right? Right? No. A Google search was unenlightening. The trivia was repeated again and again, some people didn't believe it, but no one seemed to have checked the math. I found one reference, but it was off by a factor of 60. A similar question is answered (mostly) right here.

I did the math. Based on reasonable assumptions and current population and rate of growth of China, the entire population would pass in less than 10 years. The assumptions and the math are shown in this pdf.

In 1950, when this had more currency as propaganda, it would have been less than five years. I modeled an extreme scenario" with the highest ever population and the extreme rate of population growth one year after the "great leap forward." It still takes less than 11 years for all to pass. If it's a single file line instead of eight abreast, it does take a long time, 106 years, but that's very different from never. It surprised me, but in a column 8 wide, walking slowly with reasonable space between people, 140,000,000 will walk past a point in a year. That makes quick work of the population of any country.

Conclusion: there's no basis in fact for this often repeated bit of trivia / racist propaganda.

Health Care Reform # 6

From: Joe from Philly a.k.a. Joe the Nerd a.k.a. Joe Ferraro
To: The President in a call in radio show

I'm getting a little ticked off that it feels like the knees are buckling a little bit. We have overwhelming majorities in both the House and the Senate. And we own the whole shooting match. And I'm just not getting - it's very frustrating to watch you try and compromise with a lot of these people who aren't willing to compromise with.

Joe says he was satisfied with the answer. I have been a strong supporter of Obama since the Iowa primary; I’m not satisfied.

I think Obama is throwing this away. Why is he doing that? In order, from least to most likely:

1. He’s a fraud

• He doesn’t really believe this stuff, but it got him to be President and that’s what counts.
• Not impossible, but I can’t stand to think it.

2. He’s overwhelmed

• The fight and the issue and the politics are complex and he can’t adapt proactively.
  
• This is what it looks like, but I don't think it can be true. Thinking at many levels at the same time is his strength. He proved this during the campaign.

3. He’s threatened

• My most paranoid side says that he has been told by some person in a position of total trust that awful things will happen to his family or to other innocent people if he threatens corporate interests.
• Like I said, it’s paranoid, but sometimes you can’t be paranoid enough.

4. He believes that creating a new kind of politics is more important than actually achieving any one goal.

• The political/ideological environment in the USA is toxic. People are shouting and playing for points rather than talking to each other and solving problems. The influence of money has made democracy a cover for plutocracy.
• Barack Obama wants to change that.
• Perhaps he believes that compromise on principle and accommodation to those who are dedicated to his destruction is the best approach.
• I think instead that non-violent struggle lead from the bully pulpit would be the best approach. Organization, moral persuasion, mass action and negotiation from a position of strength are tools which he knows. He can persuade us to recognize dignity in us all and demonstrate the best of progressive values. That would lead to a change in the public environment.
• Health care (and other) reform would be a natural outgrowth.

5. He’s part of the system

• There are two sides of American politics: 1) a savage, “beat the peasants in submission” capitalist side and 2) a realistic “keep the peasants from seeing the need for revolution” capitalist side. Another way to put it is that there is just one political party in this country, the Republican Democratic Party of Money. He’s a member of the party.
• He was acceptable to the corporate media, ‘nuff said. This is realistic but sad.

6. He is hoodwinked by corporate interests

• He doesn’t trust his own judgment and he has given in to pressure from inside and outside the government.
• It seems clear that this is what happened in the finance crisis, so perhaps it’s happening here. He is to some degree part of the system, and if he is being overwhelmed by the pressures of the Presidency, then this may be what is happening. He may even be justifying his weakness and vacillation by telling himself that he is moving toward a new kind of politics.

At least # 4 puts a a kind of positive spin on this. I desperately hope he wants change and that he can get back up on his feet and lead the country.

Writing -- Blogging

"I don't know what I think until I see what I say"
– attributed to Flannery O'Connor

“Every clear sentence I write removes more undergrowth of confusion from my mind.”
– attributed to Robert W. Russell

"We do not write in order to be understood, we write in order to understand."
– attributed to C. Day Lewis


I write to think. I write to learn.


Putting thoughts into sentences, and reading and editing them, lets me see each thought on its own and helps me to see how those thoughts go together. It helps me figure things out and helps me determine if an idea is significant or trivial.

I want each sentence to be defensible. I know how complex the world is and I don’t like broad statements which deny exceptions. But I also know that words like “usually,” “often,” and “mostly” make writing sound tentative. I walk a tightrope between simplification and accuracy, which can sound like the difference between confidence and mushiness.

As an example, each of the quotes above says “attributed to . . .” Quotes from famous people often have a life of their own apart from what the person actually said or believed. If it doesn’t come from an authoritative source, I don’t want to say that it’s a quote. “Attributed to . . .” is a fine compromise here.

Each word should say something, and I have to make sure that the entire piece says something. I am careful about word choice. I usually take out the unnecessary words and sometimes the unnecessary sentences. I know that I tend to leave in too many paragraphs. If I am writing for myself, it’s good to put the entire argument down to make it as clear as possible. If I am writing for others, I can let assumptions stand on their own.

My spelling is bad; my grammar is fair. Spell check takes care of most of that and grammar check helps. I like to leave a piece be for a while and come back to edit it. If I am writing something which I feel is important, I try to have it edited by someone else – but that’s a pain.

I tell myself that I don’t care if anyone reads what I write, and it’s mostly true. That doesn’t mean that I wouldn’t be excited if other people did read what I wrote.

It is self indulgent, but that is mostly ok.

Health care reform # 5

I just sent this off to the White House.

Office of the President:

I know it doesn’t work like this, but I just wrote a draft of a statement I’d like to see the President make. Please give this approach some consideration.

Statement begins:

I don’t like to tell you this, but the fact is; I can’t get a good health-care bill through the congress right now. The insurance companies and the pharmaceutical companies are pushing millions and millions of dollars into lobbying your senators and representatives. The people’s voice is not being heard in Washington. There are also those who legitimately disagree over the place of government. They don’t want a government which solves problems and serves the people.

I could work with congress and entrenched interests and have a measure passed and signed this year. But that measure would have so many compromises that it wouldn’t really solve the problem. I want to work with the Republicans in the House and Senate, but I’m disappointed to say that I can’t find enough Republicans who share my beliefs and there are too many who for political purposes are willing to sacrifice the public good because they want to bring me down.

I know from the people I talk to, and from reading the stories that are sent to me, and from studying the polls, that Americans want a health care system which provides for all Americans. I know that they want a system which controls the skyrocketing cost of our health-care system. They want a system that doesn’t fail them when they need it most. They want a system where illness does not bring financially secure families into bankruptcy. We want a healthcare system that we can be proud of – one where American rates of infant mortality and lifespan are as good as those of the rest of the industrialized world.

Here is the plan I put forward today. In a year and a half, we have midterm elections for the House and the Senate. There will be 35 seats up for grabs in the senate and the people will vote for all 435 seats in the house. I will campaign for some of those candidates.

By the end of 2009, I will announce and publish a clear and simple proposal for universal health care. It will be a smart plan. It will not be a confusing - conflicting - costly plan put together by the competing interests of corporations. It will be based on the best of American health care and the best of other countries around the world which have had universal health care for 30 – 40 – 50 years. If the people who support my plan are elected into office, then in two years we will pass real health care reform. This will be a national referendum on health care.

No plan will make everyone happy. Entrenched interests will oppose it. I know the fact that it will not be good for every industry. But it will be good for America. It will give America what it wants, what it deserves, what it needs.

End of statement.

I truly believe that this is what the President should do at this time. A single-payer plan or its equivalent is the only way to solve this problem.


Sincerely, John Schreiber

Copy to blog

As I said above, I know it doesn't really work like this, but maybe it could. At very least, it helped me think through my feelings.

The real reason some people oppose gay marriage

I am a supporter of gay marriage. Lots of people disagree. I start with an assumption that the people I disagree with are rational, but in this case, I was having a hard time understanding them. Why do people feel that marriage is under “attack” and that it needs “defending.” I thought about it a lot – still assuming rationality.

I started demolishing the stated arguments point by point, but many people had already done that and I didn’t really add anything new. I knew there had to be more than the stated arguments. Homophobia is one explanation, but it can’t be a reason by itself. Then I recognized that there is a huge overlap between groups who oppose gay marriage and those who support a male dominated hierarchical world view.

I think I figured it out. Gay marriage DOES threaten society, if you have an old definition of marriage.

If one believes that in a marriage:

• roles are defined based gender, or
• that men must have a leadership role and women must have a submissive role, or
• that the family is a patriarchal, ownership institution, or
• that the man is the master and his wife and children are chattel,

then a marriage between two people of the same gender is impossible.

A marriage between equals means that those traditional views of marriage can not true. How can two women marry? There would be no leader. How could two men marry? There would be two leaders. In the traditional view, where roles are decided based purely on each person’s sex, there is no room for two people of the same sex.

If such a marriage can succeed, the traditional view of marriage must be wrong. If sex roles are flexible, how does a man know his place? How does a woman know her place? How does a man remain the king of his castle and keep his woman in her place?

If gay marriage is allowed, the whole hierarchical structure of society is under attack. If I depended on such a structure, I would feel like I am under attack. I find that those who most depend on a hierarchical society, who have the most to lose if their positions are threatened are also those with the greatest objection to gay marriage.


I wish this lead to a strategy, but at least right now, I don't see one.

Podcasts

I like to listen to podcasts. Music doesn't interest me - I'm tone deaf. Podcasts are like talk radio except I can choose my area of interest and choose hosts who aren't idiots. That's not generally an option on broadcast radio. I listen while I do housework, yardwork, work in the shop or drive. It's great just about anytime when I'm alone, don't need to concentrate too hard on my work and in the mood to learn.

I don't always listen though, often I give my full attention to my work or I prefer natural sounds.

This has changed the way I consume news. I still get most of my news in written form from the Internet, but I don't pick up as much from radio (and I don't watch TV at all). That gives me a less frenetic response to current events. I know enough about the world that I don't need fresh details every hour. I need more quality analysis and less distraction.

This American Life
I’ve been listening to This American Life on public radio since it started back in 1995. It is a mix of fiction and non-fiction always told as a story. “I laughed. I cried.“ I had a cliché moment. I don’t think there’s anything out there like it or better than it.

The Skeptics' Guide to the Universe
When this comes up on my mp3 player, I know I'm going to enjoy the next hour. Dr. Steven Novella and his "Rogues" discuss the latest science and the state of rational thinking. More than a little irreverent, but they take reality seriously. One of my favorite podcasts.

Bill Moyers Journal
A very smart, very experienced journalist who interviews experts in detail. I often learn that what I thought I knew about an issue was wrong and/or oversimplified. I understand the world better because I listen to this. Some topics don’t interest me as much, but the intelligence makes it worthwhile to listen to anyway.

The History of Rome
A straightforward telling of what happened and when in the the Roman Empire. Made interesting by describing competing interpretations of personalities and motivations and by placing events within the sweep of history. I often listen to each podcast twice because I am unfamiliar with the names and the time line. I visualize the podcaster, Mike Duncan, with a bit of a smirk on his face as he tells his stories.

The Classic Tales Podcast
Classic short stories read by B.J. Harrison. Many stories and authors I’ve wanted to read, but never got around to.

To the Best of our Knowledge
A calm-and-rational detailed look at a topic twice per week. I've been listening to it on public radio for years.

Skeptoid: Critical Analysis of Pop Phenomena
I enjoy hearing from Brian Dunning as he blows another bit of pseudoscience out of the water. Unfortunately, in trying to make his points, he sometimes uses logical fallacies himself. Especially creating a straw-man arguments implying that a few points represent an entire concept. Many skeptics don't want to be called debunkers. Skeptoid attacks bunk every week.

Media Matters with Bob McChesney
This comes out of my hometown public radio station - WILL AM. Bob McChesney has high-powered, knowledgeable guests on every week to talk the world with special emphasis on the media. Recent guests include Naomi Klien, Ralph Nader and Noam Chomsky. Similar to Bill Moyers Journal in that I learn that what passes for news and discussion is really just a mask covering the real issues.

Slate’s Political Gabfest
Three smart, knowledgeable and opinionated people talk about the week’s national politics. Very “inside the beltway.”

Blast the Right
A look at the talking points of the political right, addressed from the political left. Presented as arguments to use when you meet your favorite “right-winger” at the water cooler. Host Jack Clark has a confrontational style, but the facts are good and the style is exciting.

Radio Lab
A highly produced science program asking irreverent but relevant questions about science and our relationship to science.

Point of Inquiry
Calm and incisive interview show put on by the Center for Inquiry “focusing on CFI’s issues: religion, human values and the borderlands of science“.

Science Talk by Scientific American
Calm and incisive interview show put on by Scientific American. Science and technology are always interesting.

Selected Shorts
Short stories presented live at “Symphony Space” in NYC. Mostly modern fiction. Some stories can be challenging and sometimes I’m not in the mood for the story presented, but there are plenty of good ones to make it worth listening to.

Grammar Girl: quick and dirty tips for better writing
Grammar should be fun. Short interesting discussions about grammar and usage.

Stuff You Missed in History Class Podcast
I finally came up with the word to describe the hosts: glib. This show brings out the curmudgeon in me. None the less, I enjoy it and learn from it.

Change

I found this quote from President Obama in Thomas Friedman's 6/3/09 opinion piece in the NYT.

"We have a joke around the White House," the president said. "We’re just going to keep on telling the truth until it stops working."

Though I often disagree with the President, this is the kind of things that gives me hope.

The Box

Originally posted 5/19/09
Jean Piaget described stages of development based on the idea that humans understand in different ways at different ages. Although Piaget over-simplified, I think the idea is sound. It is impossible for a child to think like an adult. The solutions available to an adult are not available to a child.

What is impossible for an adult to think of? What levels of reasoning or abstraction are humans unable to accomplish.

Can we create computers which can go beyond us? Computers can already duplicate known theories based on data. I suspect that computers will soon be able to create theories which are beyond our ability to think of.

That would truly be thinking outside of the box.

Life in Earth Orbit

Originally posted 5/19/09
I predict that in the next ten years, much of the space around Earth will be inaccessible to us. With more and more debris in space, the risk of impacts due to space debris increases geometrically. There will be a cascade of collisions which will make low Earth orbit too dangerous to put expensive satellites (or people) into. It will remain inaccessible for hundreds of years or until it is cleaned up.

Today, depending on your definition, there are as few as ten-thousand or as many as one-million things in orbit around the Earth.

In low Earth orbit (LEO) everything must traveling at least 14,000 miles per hour. Impacts can happen at relative speeds of up to 35,000 mph. Visualize two cars hitting each other at a closing speed of 35,000 mph; pieces will fly off in all directions. Most of the new objects created from the collision will not be in sustainable orbits but enough of it will hang around to be a hazard to other objects in space.

If there are 10,000 objects in space, and two of them collide at high speed, there might immediately be 10,500 objects in space. That increases the chance of additional collisions and the number of objects will continue to increase.

This won't be a problem in all orbits. Because of atmospheric drag, nothing lasts for long in very low Earth orbit; so there won't be too much debris there. Of course because of the atmospheric drag it's difficult to keep a useful satellite there for long. Distant orbits and specifically geosynchronous orbits may be available too. There is a whole lot of extra room out that way and objects are generally traveling in similar directions making them less likely to collide.

Space is a tough place to get anything done. We need to do what we can to keep it from getting more difficult. Solutions are hugely expensive, but we need to study them. If cost benefit analysis is being done to examine this issue, I haven't heard it discussed.

Torture

We shouldn’t torture because:

• It’s immoral and illegal.
  

• It doesn’t matter if it is effective, but if it is to be justified because of effectiveness, it must be compared with traditional interrogation techniques, not against no interrogation at all.
  

• It sets a moral standard for the rest of the world to follow - at very least, this means our citizens are more likely to be tortured.

I wrote to the President: (Sometimes I just gotta do it.)

Mr. President,

We should prosecute and acknowledge the crime of torture because:

• Lack of acknowledgment that it was a crime increases the likelihood that torture will be justified in the future.
• Next time we are attacked, those who stopped torture will be blamed for not preventing the attack.

While it is not a convenient time politically to bring up this issue, that is not the standard we have for following the Constitution.

Thank you,

By our Pupils We'll Be Taught

This restates and expands on the entry A New Idea for Education posted 3/5/09.

---

Does it really make sense to learn things, when you aren’t going to use them again after the test? Students know it’s going to happen, but I’m realizing that teachers do it too. When teachers teach, they learn about their students. They learn how their students learn best. They become more effective teachers. But after the final exam, what they learn is mostly thrown away.

In any student / teacher relationship, communication goes both ways.. Good teachers monitor non-verbal communication, class participation, test performance, one-on-one interactions and a myriad of other sources of information. They gradually develop a profile of each student which helps them to reach into the student’s mind to make a connection. I haven’t taught semester long classes, but even in shorter term training, as I learn about my students, I become a more effective communicator and have more success.

Most students, especially in academic disciplines, are pretty well adapted to educational culture. The teacher’s default approach will probably work pretty well with them. It’s the other students who need a different approach: the students who learn kinesthetically rather than through books and lectures; those who need a detailed explanation and are not willing to accept new information “just because”; the student who can develop a relationship with the material, but can’t maintain a relationship with classmates. There are as many combinations of learning characteristics as there are students.

What if placement tests, learning style surveys, high school information, and the students own suggestions could be used to develop a profile of learning characteristics for each student? What if instructors could verify and add to that information? With that profile, the students can learn about their own educational strengths and weaknesses. Teachers, tutors and counselors will have insight into how to be most effective with that student. Each semester will start out on a roll instead of having to get going again from a dead stop. While information about a student’s strengths and weaknesses can be helpful, it cannot be a strict prescription. Material cannot always be adapted to a student’s strengths and weaknesses. In a lecture hall, there is not as much room for customization as in smaller classes and tutoring.

Practically, I envision that when a teacher receives a class roster, the roster would include some summary information about the class and how that class compares with others in the college and department. That could help the teacher decide which instructional methods to use. There would also be a few key words on the learning characteristics of each student. After the first day of class, an instructor might check to see which students stuck out in class and what special needs there may be. For students who need more than a line to describe their learning style, there would be a reference to where to find those notes.

This information could also be mined to increase effectiveness college wide. For example, we could measure changes in students’ learning strengths over time and students could how see those changes impact them. There may be relationships between learning characteristics and career choice. Even student or teacher demographics may have a significant impact.

There are potential problems with this approach. No one wants additional testing. No one wants additional work for instructors. There could be a privacy concern in developing a “profile.” And of course, this idea may not work at all.

This idea occurred to me when reading about how businesses study their customers individually and as groups. I thought about the difference between business and education in how we “maximize” our relationships. That thought process grew into the ideas above. I am new to higher education, working on institutional research in a community college. I have described this in that context, but I can see applications in other environments too. I think this is an idea worth exploring.

Anti-Missile Fantasies

Space fascinates me. I follow what's happening there. I just saw this story in Wired's Danger Room.

There was much debate about the effectiveness of anti-missile systems, but no debate about the plausibility and significance of somebody launching an ICBM toward the USA. I had to comment:

If somebody has an operational nuke, and wants to use it, an ICBM is the dumbest way to go. An ICBM leaves a trail showing right where it came from.

Any "evil doers" will hide their nuke in a freighter and drive it up the Hudson River or into San Francisco Bay. If they really want an air burst, it's much easier to launch from 100 miles offshore than from the other side of the world.

I can’t imagine any scenario where our best efforts should be spent trying to stop a missile flying toward us. There must be hundreds of more efficient ways to make the world safer.

Thanks,

Sometimes I just can't help myself.

Moderates vs. Extremists

I listened to a podcast of This American Life earlier today. Act Two, Does This Suit Make Me Look Terrorist To You? of the 2009/03/13 show had one point which I thought spoke very clearly.

The world is at war right now, but it’s not a war of Christian vs. Muslim. It’s a war of moderates vs. extremists, and the two groups are battling it out in places like Iraq and Afghanistan. But they’re also battling here in America.

Extremists have advantages: It's easier to explain the world in stark terms of right and wrong. Extremists can force moderates to acknowledge them through violence.

But, history is on the side of moderates. I see gradual unsteady movement toward an acknowledgment of subtly. As the world has become more complex, it has required increasingly complex thinking. The skills that are necessary to succeed in this world also enable people to see the whole world in more complexity. Hence increased moderation.

A New Idea for Education

I’ve got an idea. Not sure if it is a new one, but I came up with it while reading the introduction to Data Driven by Thomas C. Redman. The importance of businesses really knowing who their customers were on an individual basis was mentioned and I thought about how I could apply that idea. I work in the institutional research office of a community college. I have done formal teaching/training, but I have not taught semester long courses. This idea comes primarily from my personal experience in education. It is not based on any empirical research, but does relate to my understanding of some educational theory.

I know that when I teach, I became more effective over the length of the course because of what I learn about the students’ strengths and weaknesses. I believe and have confirmed anecdotally that at the end of a tutoring relationship, course, semester or year, teachers know more about their students and are more effective.

At the end of the term that knowledge is lost. There is no way for a future teacher to benefit from the information gained. The knowledge of the students’ strengths and weaknesses has not been added to or refined. The students also may not have learned more about their learning strengths and weaknesses in ways that they can apply to future education.

Instead there could be a system which could collect knowledge about the students’ learning styles and make it available to the student and future teachers. This would help the teacher better plan their educational approach and it would help the student plan their learning approach. Right now, teachers can access student present and past transcripts. This gives them a broad stoke of information about the student’s past, but more specific information may help them teach better.

Initial sources of information might include:

· Placement test results – perhaps broken down beyond a single score to show what areas of the test were successful and which were not.

· Learning style inventories.

· Student’s self report of strengths and weaknesses.

Then as education continues:

· Past teacher’s impressions and reflections on the standardized information above.

· Results of various types of assignments in past classes.

· Reports from tutors or support teachers.

· Additional standardized inventories.

I’m not sure exactly what kind of information would be useful at this point. One traditional kind of information is so-called “learning styles”; that is whether a person is better at absorbing information through auditory, visual, kinesthetic or reading channels. I’m not sure how valid learning styles are, or if they are applied properly, but it is one possible dimension of a learning profile. Other possible dimensions may answer the question, Does the student learn better:

· in a classroom or on-line?

· with a passive or an active teacher?

· under time pressure or without?

· in groups or individually?

· in large or small classes?

· It might also tell if a student best shares their knowledge (testing) by writing essays, speaking, answering open ended or multiple choice questions, under time pressure or without.

I’m sure there are many other dimensions; those are just a few to throw out.

This knowledge does not mean that all of a student’s differences must be accommodated, but it does give more information which can make teaching and learning more effective. Strengthening weaknesses may be just as important as taking advantages of strengths. Such knowledge may also help in career placement.

The information gained would be available to students and hopefully to teachers. Perhaps when a course roster is received, it would also include information about the class as a whole and/or about individual students. Training for staff would be required so they would know how to be most effective with various students. There is a privacy concern which should be addressed.

I’ll think about this some more and perhaps it might be a good enough idea to pursue. For now, it’s out here and maybe it will help someone.

An Invitation to Join the Natural System

Originally posted 2008/06/29 in my old blog

Last summer I was visiting family in West Virginia and we had been canoeing. While waiting for others to catch up, I was lying on my back watching the large birds circling in a thermal on the side of a nearby mountain. There were dozens of them about a half mile away and at various altitudes, probably 400 - 800 feet. It appeared that they never moved a feather while circling in place. Beautiful to watch, especially when tired after canoeing.

Gradually, they changed positions. It appeared that they moved out of the thermal and were having to flap their wings occasionally to maintain altitude even as they descended. I wondered if the wind had shifted or if they saw some carrion which had attracted them to the new location. It seemed they were circling almost right over me.

They got lower and lower, and these birds are big. I could see them quite clearly when they were over a half mile away, and seeing them closer now, I realized that they had wing spans of three to five feet. Still thinking about why they had changed their orbits, I realized that they were looking down at me and wondering if I were available to eat yet.

After that epiphany, I got up and walked around to show just how alive I was.

The beautiful birds returned to their thermals in the mountains and I felt the closeness we have to nature deeper in my bones than I ever had before.